MOHAVE COUNTY — At the regular Mohave County Board of Supervisors meeting on Monday, March 2, Supervisor Ron Gould presented a list of 13 books upon completion of his review of recently donated materials. After hearing from dozens of citizens over the course of two hours, the board voted in a 3-2 decision to remove those books from the collection of donated materials.
The response to Supervisor Gould’s motion to strike the books was mixed, both on the board and among those in attendance. Some viewed the item as a procedural issue, while others on both sides viewed it as a moral problem.
Regarding procedure, Library Director Jacob Barillaro was present to provide clarity about the library’s current process for intake of new collections.
Supervisor Travis Lingenfelter ultimately voted against the motion but advocated for tools that might allow parents more control. For example, he advocated for a mandatory annual re-authorization by parents, as well as more communication via text messages and a possible monthly summary of materials checked out by children.
However, Barillaro said this may violate an Arizona law—ARS 42-1354—which says that privacy laws apply to minors as well as adults. This means libraries are not allowed to disclose which books are being checked out by minors. “It has been determined by the Mohave County Attorney’s Office that ARS 41-1354 applies to minors and protects all library users against disclosure,” Barillaro said, reading from a statement.
However, because children require an adult to obtain a library card, parents may be contacted in the event a book becomes lost or damaged because the parent is still financially responsible.
Lingenfelter asked about whether the library could establish different tiers, where children could be restricted from checking out certain books. Barillaro said they’ve never had a policy like that but said he would look into it.
Some residents spoke in favor of the motion, arguing that the government has an obligation to keep inappropriate materials away from children. Others argued that this was not censorship because the books are available elsewhere to purchase.
For most of those speaking during public comment, though, the whole discussion was viewed as an attempt to censor books.
Kingman Area Literacy Program Director Erin Roper spoke about the feedback she’s received since the issue was raise a month ago. “I have received text messages, emails, and in-person feedback from Mohave County constituents and the feedback has been overwhelmingly against government censorship of our libraries.”
One resident presented a petition of over 500 signatures opposing the measure, as well as 58 signed postcards.
Other members spoke in defense of the books themselves. “I am so sorry that there are individuals on the board who have serious issues with members of the LGBTQ community,” one resident said. “That it their personal problem, it is not the problem of the public.”
One resident said that ALA does not have any of the books listed as controversial and that none of them contain sexually explicit material.
Supervisor Borrelli said he thinks questionable books should be classified and separated, but his statements elicited commotion from attendees when he spoke about grooming. “But the real troubling part is that grown adults are literally—are in favor of grooming children into a sexual orientation and a lifestyle.”
Former Mohave County Library District administrator Jess Hawkins spoke about the need to trust library workers. “Librarians are degreed professionals with training,” she said. “Let them do their jobs.”
Public comment concluded with a heated exchange between Supervisor Gould and a Kingman resident and veteran named TJ Finn, who identified himself as a licensed attorney and member of the Arizona Bar Association. He spoke strongly about the illegality of removing books because of their viewpoints, saying court precedent is very clear on the matter.
Finn quoted a famous SCOTUS case, saying: “Boards may not remove books from school library shelves simply because they dislike the ideas contained in those books and seek by their removal to proscribe what shall be orthodox in politics, religion, or other matters of public opinion.”
Supervisor Gould then challenged Finn, accusing him of misstating facts because the books would not be pulled from the shelves, but rather blocked. Finn countered that the courts would treat them the same because the point of contention is discrimination against a viewpoint.
Gould continued challenging the attorney’s understanding of the constitution, but the attorney shot back.
“I suppose you’re welcome to take the county on a wild goose chase and try to expand the powers of this board to impose moral viewpoints on the people of the county,” Finn responded. “I mean, that seems like a massive waste of time and resources, but if that’s your personal crusade you’re welcome to undertake it, but I think there’s a lot of people who are prepared to resist that as well.”
Supervisor Don Martin took a more libertarian stance, expressing that while he does not approve of certain materials in the list, he does not feel it was the government’s role to decide what’s appropriate. He said he prayed about the topic, and after thinking about book-burnings in Nazi Germany, ultimately came to see it as a First Amendment issue.
With Martin and Lingenfelter expressing opposition and Borrelli in support, Supervisor Rich Lettmen became the deciding vote. He also held up a copy of The Beautiful Something Else and claimed to have read it over the weekend, and found it to be inappropriate.
Lettman asked former administrator Jess Hawkins to return to the podium to explain how librarians review books. He objected to the notion that no books should be banned at all. Lettman asked if it would be appropriate to reject certain types of books, such as books containing violence against women.
Hawkins pointed out that many fiction books in the collection already fit that description. He views the establishment of community standards as fundamentally different than censorship.
“The problem with censoring or removing materials is that everyone’s viewpoint is a little different,” Hawkins explained. “So when it comes to collection development, librarians are very respectful. They are trained and they are degreed and they select materials that best represent the community that they serve. In addition to having a wide variety of opinions, including representing marginalized groups, there are people in our society that are marginalized and they have a voice, too.”
